CABINET OFFICE

National School of Government

Jim Murphy: As part of a review being conducted by Sir Gus O'Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, into the role and functions of the Cabinet Office, I can announce our intention to establish the National School of Government as a separate non-ministerial Department. This change of status will support the National School of Government's strategy to become a more customer-led organisation that is providing a shared service across the civil service and the wider public sector. Further details will be published in a framework document later this year.

Correspondence

Jim Murphy: I am today publishing a report on Departments' and Agencies' performanceon handling Members' and Peers' correspondence for 2005. Details are set out in the attached table. Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.
	The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.
	
		Correspondence from MPs / Peers to Ministers and Agency Chief Executives(1)
		
			  2004 2005  
			  Target set for reply (working days) Number of letters received Percentage of replies within target Target set for reply (working days) Number of letters received % of replies within target 
		
		
			 Department or Agency  
			 Cabinet Office 15 637 88 15 537 97 
			 Department for Constitutional Affairs 20 3,416 64 20 3,179 92 
			 Court Service 15 429 95 15 359 99 
			 HM Land Registry 20 44 95 15 55 96 
			 National Archives 15 149 100 10 30 100 
			 Northern Ireland Court Service(2) 15 14 92 – – – 
			 Official Solicitor and Public Trustee 15 17 100 15 26 100 
			 Public Guardianship Office 15 134 93 15 112 99 
			 Crown Prosecution Service 15 520 98 15 476 98 
			 HM Customs and Excise(3) 18 1,321 51 – – – 
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 18 4,817 78 20 5,085 63 
			 Ministry of Defence4 15 5,989 62 15 5,378 79 
			 Armed Forces Personnel Administration Agency 15 126 99 15 207 99 
			 Defence Estates(2) 15 11 100 – – – 
			 Veterans Agency 15 287 99 15 138 99 
			 Warship Support Agency(2) 15 15 91 – – – 
			 Department for Education and Skills 15 15,313 93 15 18,547 86 
			 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 15 14,305 81 15 12,051 75 
			 Food Standards Agency 20 782* 59 20 738* 73 
			  20 78** 95 20 91** 90 
			 * Letters where Health Ministers have replied. 
			 ** Letters where Chief Executive/Chairman has replied. 
			 Foreign and Commonwealth Office(5) 20 26,942 83 20 9,588 80 
			   
			 UK Visas(6) 15 12,849 45 15 9,189* 45 
			 20 1,720** 58 
			 *Letters where UK Visa officials have replied.  
			 **Letters where FCO Ministers have replied. 
			 Department of Health 20 20,140 80 20 20,155 91 
			 Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency 10 284 81 10 340 92 
			 NHS Estates(7) 20 112 73 20 90 86 
			 NHS Purchasing and Supplies Agency 20 57 60 20 32 86 
			 Home Office (non IND correspondence) 15 9,445 76 15 8,899 79 
			 Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND)(8) 20 35,802 34 20 41,063 53 
			 Criminal Records Bureau 10 272 95 10 471 94 
			 HM Prison Service 20 1,154 73 20 868 80 
			 UK Passport Service 10 486 74 10 524 60 
			 Department for International Development 15 4,686 80 15 4,593 67 
			 Inland Revenue(3) 18 2,993 85 – – – 
			  18 1,601* 45 – – – 
			 *Local tax office delegated figures (where local tax offices have replied direct to MPs)  
			 Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Lord's Office 15 60 87 15 143 95 
			 Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers 20 404 63 20 335 68 
			 Northern Ireland Office 10 567 68 10 742 64 
			 Compensation Agency 7 125 67 7 62 100 
			 Northern Ireland Prison Service 10 48 85 10 39 92 
			 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 15 10,135 81 15 8,937 79 
			 Planning Inspectorate 8 379 81 10 243 67 
			 Office of the Leader of the House of Commons 15 504 95 15 302 97 
			 Scotland Office 15 82 77 15 56 53 
			 Department for Trade and Industry(9) 15 11,807 72 15 10,821 50 
			 Companies House 10 56 98 10 38 100 
			 Employment Tribunals Service 10 61 93 10 91 95 
			 Insolvency Service 10 33 94 10 99 98 
			 Patent Office 10 297 84 10 496 94 
			 Department for Transport 15 8,593 86 15 7,849 80 
			 Driving Standards Agency 15 198 79 15 89 87 
			 DVLA 7 1,276 100 7 1,113 100 
			 Government Car and Despatch Agency – – – 7 16 100 
			 Highways Agency 15 285 95 15 287 99 
			 Maritime and Coastguard Agency 10 20 100 10 18 100 
			 Vehicle and Operator Services Agency 15 13 77 15 16 94 
			  
			 HM Treasury(1) 0 15 4,316 86 15 2,585 84 
			 HM Revenue and Customs(3) – – – 18 4,231 72 
			 18 1,601* 45 
			 National Savings and Investments 15 74 92 15 21 95 
			 National Statistics 15 189 95 15 155 91 
			  10 133 73 10 114** 84 
			 Valuation Office 18 18 83 18 21 80 
			 *Local Tax Office 'Delegated' figures (where local tax offices have replied directly to MPs). The marked increase in correspondence in quarters 3 and 4 of 2004 continued throughout 2005 unabated. Clearances during the year were affected by moving some complaint drafters to help to clear Disputed Overpayments. Currently restructuring how we deal with complaints and performance should improve. 
			 **Letters where National Statistician replied on Ministers' behalf 
			 Treasury Solicitor's Department 10 49 98 10 28 100 
			 Wales Office 15 109 92 15 83 80 
			 Department for Work and Pensions 20 13,319 86 20 10,596 90 
			 Appeals Service 15 50 98 15 60 95 
			 Child Support Agency 15 5,390 88 15 5,367 99 
			 Debt Management 15 25 100 15 35 100 
			 Disability and Carers Service 15 451 100 15 425 100 
			 Health and Safety Executive 10 127 70 15 77 77 
			 Jobcentre Plus 15 1,136 90 15 1,062 90 
			 The Pension Service 15 1,340 89 15 1,042 98 
		
	
	(1) Departments and Agencies which received 10 MPs/Peers letters or fewer during 2005 are not shown in this table. Holding or interim replies are not included unless otherwise indicated. This report includes letters from prospective candidates prior to the general election. The report does not include correspondence considered as Freedom of Information requests.
	(2) Received fewer than 10 letters in 2005.
	(3) With effect from 1 April 2005, HM Customs and Excise and the Inland Revenue merged to form HM Revenue and Customs.
	(4) Includes a small number of letters from members of the public that received a ministerial reply. Figure also includes some FOI requests, though these represent less than 1 per cent of total reported.
	(5) Reduced volume of correspondence compared to previous years reflects the setting up of a central correspondence system and the introduction of a more accurate method of monitoring letters received.
	(6) Poor performance caused by backlog of cases and resource issues. Performance for December 2005 was 75 per cent, increased to 81 per cent in March 2006.
	(7) Abolished in September 2005.
	(8) IND saw an increase in volume of 15 per cent between 2004 and 2005 (6 per cent increase in ministerial, and 21 per cent in official replies). During 2005 all official replies were again signed off by IND senior executive group members which inevitably built delays into the system, but had the effect of significantly enhancing the quality of replies.
	(9) Performance slipped last year due to internal reorganisation following a reduction in staff numbers. Launch of new centralised response unit will raise level of performance.
	(10)Includes all ministerial correspondence.

TREASURY

Inheritance Tax and Pensions Simplification

Ivan Lewis: HM Revenue and Customs will be publishing tomorrow on their website draft Finance Bill provisions that clarify how inheritance tax rules will apply to members of registered pension schemes on and after 6 April 2006. A copy of the drafts will be available in the Library of the House.
	Details of how this measure will apply were published on Budget day.

Valuation Office Agency

Dawn Primarolo: I have today set the following key performance indicators for the Valuation Office Agency for 2006–07:
	CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
	To achieve overall customer satisfaction of 88 per cent.
	Operations
	Enable prompt issue of correct bills by local authorities through clearance of 90 per cent. of rating reports, and 95 per cent. of council tax reports within two months of receipt.
	Enable prompt issue of tax assessments by clearing all HMRC initial appraisal cases for inheritance tax on average within 12 days.
	Contain reductions in the 2005 rating lists to a maximum of 4.2 per cent. of the total compiled list rateable value, over the entire life of the lists.
	Ensure that 96 per cent. of new council tax bandings are right first time.
	Value For Money
	To improve productivity by 5 per cent. in 2006–07 and be on course to achieve 15 per cent. improvement over the four years to 2007–08.
	To improve value for money on inheritance tax work for HMRC by 5 per cent.
	People
	All staff to have the core skills and competencies for their role within six months of taking up post.

DEFENCE

Armed Forces Personnel Administration Agency (Performance Targets 2006–07)

Don Touhig: The key targets have been set for the Chief Executive of the Armed Forces Personnel Administration Agency (AFPAA) for the financial year 2006–07. The Targets build upon progress made by the Agency since it formed on 1 April 1997 and reflect the importance of the delivery of Joint Personnel Administration whilst maintaining current outputs. They provide customers with an assurance that, as well as focusing on Joint Personnel Administration and critical services such as pay and pensions, AFPAA will continue to give high priority to the delivery of both current and historic medals.
	To Deliver Pay
	To make 99.9 per cent. of all pay payments by the due date (excluding late payments caused by events determined to be outside the control of the Agency).
	To keep the monthly error rate of accuracy for the volume of payments within 0.5 per cent.
	To Deliver Pension Services
	To make 99 per cent. of all pension payments (including new awards) by the due date (excluding late payments caused by events determined to be outside the control of the Agency).
	To keep the monthly error rate of accuracy for the volume of payments within 0.1 per cent.
	To Support the Delivery of Joint Personnel Administration Programme
	To achieve live service to the RN in accordance with target set by MOD (currently by end October 2006).
	To achieve live service to the Army in accordance with target set by MOD (currently by end March 2007).
	To deliver an effective Enquiry Centre Service
	To deal with 75 per cent. of queries received by the Enquiry Centre on first contact.
	To prepare for delivery of AFPAA services post 2009
	To develop the AFPAA contribution to the project team, establish and meet 100 per cent. of milestones i.e. achieve Investment Approval (Initial Gate).
	To meet approved efficiency targets for the delivery of core services
	To deliver Joint Personnel Administration (JPA) efficiencies in line with the benefits identified in the approved business case for JPA.
	To deliver an efficient and effective MOD Medal Office
	To deliver current medals against applications within the timescales agreed with the Services and Ministers:
	Current campaign medals within 35 working days
	Conduct and Reserve medals within 45 working days
	Historic medals (including Canal Zone) within 70 working days.

Project Falcon

Adam Ingram: I am pleased to announce that a contract will be signed today with BAE Systems Insyte for the first increment of the Falcon Secure Trunk Communication System. Falcon will provide a modern, secure communications infrastructure for deployed formations and operating bases. As such it will help deliver the resilient information infrastructure that is key to providing our Armed Forces with the network enabled capability they need in the 21st Century. The contract is valued at over £200 million and the equipment will enter into service at the turn of the decade. This programme will also sustain more than 400 skilled jobs in the UK as well as helping British industry to remain at the forefront of military communications.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

FiReBuy Limited

Jim Fitzpatrick: I am pleased to inform the House that today we will be establishing a new executive non-departmental public body in England—FiReBuy Limited.
	In November 2005 the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published the National Procurement Strategy for the Fire and Rescue Service as part of the wider modernisation agenda. This gave effect to recommendations by the Audit Commission in their reports "In the Line of Fire" 1995 and "A Uniform Approach" 2000, as well as the 2002 report independent review of the FRS by Professor Sir George Bain, "The Future of the Fire Service: reducing risk, saving lives" and the 2003 White Paper "Our Fire and Rescue Service".
	National procurement will contribute savings to the wider efficiency agenda, and savings made by Fire and Rescue Authorities (FRAs) will be retained locally for reinvestment in front-line services. FiReBuy Ltd. has been established as the national procurement body for the Fire and Rescue Service. In addition to being a non- departmental public body, FiReBuy Ltd. has been established as a company limited by guarantee.
	FiReBuy Ltd. will enable savings to be made by negotiating better deals for buying in bulk and will eliminate the duplication of procurement of fire-specific equipment by individual FRAs. Rather than all 47 FRAs negotiating separately for service-specific items such as vehicles, protective clothing and respiratory equipment, FiReBuy Ltd. will negotiate contracts on their behalf and take the lead in subsequent contract monitoring and service level monitoring. It will be a Contracting Authority for the purposes of the EU procurement rules but ultimately it will remain the FRAs who acquire the assets and matching liabilities.
	FiReBuy Ltd. will take the lead role in testing and acceptance activities for the lines of spend within its remit, thus avoiding the duplication of this work in each FRA.
	A Chair, Mrs. Liz Barron, and a Board of five non-executive directors have been appointed after an open public competition held in accordance with the Code of Practice of the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. Three ex-officio Directors have been appointed to represent the Local Government Association, the Chief Fire Officers' Association and the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority.
	Copies of the new organisation's management statement and financial statement, once approved by the FiReBuy board and the Deputy Prime Minister, will be placed in the House Libraries later in the spring.

Firelink

Jim Fitzpatrick: Following a detailed evaluation of the bids from EADS Defence and Security Systems Ltd and O2 Airwave Ltd, I am announcing today that the Firelink contract has been let to O2 Airwave Ltd. This contracts ODPM to rolling-out the Firelink system in England and creates a framework for extending the system to Scotland and Wales, subject to decisions by Ministers in the Scottish Executive and the National Assembly for Wales.
	Firelink brings fire and rescue service wide area radio communications into the 21st century with the levels of resilience and interoperability that these challenging times require, whilst ensuring the British taxpayer gets the best possible value for money.
	Firelink will provide the service with a secure, highly resilient and flexible system supporting both voice and data communications and enable improved interoperability between fire and rescue services and other emergency services.

Planning Delivery Grant Finalisation

Yvette Cooper: In December I announced the first provisional allocations for the 2006–07 round of planning delivery grant in England, the majority of which is a performance-related grant paid to local authorities in recognition of their work in planning. Today I am finalising these allocations and announcing the remaining final elements of the Grant to the House.
	The Government's aim is to enhance the resourcing of the planning system in a way that drives performance improvement and ensures effective delivery of our objectives for sustainable communities. Planning delivery grant is specifically targeted towards meeting the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Public Service Agreements (PSA) 5 and 6. PSA 5 aims to achieve a better balance between housing availability and demand. PSA 6 requires all authorities to have local development frameworks in place (in accordance with agreed local development schemes) and to meet the best value development control targets by March 2007. Beyond this date the PSA requires local authorities to maintain this level of performance.
	The Planning Delivery Grant (PDG) is not ring-fenced or hypothecated beyond the condition that 25 per cent. of the total received by authorities in the 2006–07 financial year must be used for capital expenditure. In that financial year, £135 million will support planning services through the PDG, in addition to other efforts at boosting the resources available to enhance good planning, such as the raising of planning fees in April 2005.
	I can confirm today the amount of grant to be distributed to authorities in 2006–07 is just over £127 million. It will be paid to local planning authorities at a London borough, district and county level, national park authorities, regional planning bodies, the broads authority and the Greater London Authority. The remaining £7.975 million of the grant will be used to support a number of national initiatives and this is broken down as follows: The planning advisory service and the advisory team for large applications will both be allocated £2 million each for their work supporting local authority planning performance; £2 million will be allocated to the planning inspectorate for their work on local development plan preparation; £0.5 million will be used to support the implementation of planning for housing policies in "Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing", which will be published in the summer; £1.3 million to fund post-graduate planning bursaries to address issues caused by the shortage of qualified planners and £175,000 to develop a development control certificate. This is a qualification which would provide planning support staff with a university accredited qualification to equip them to deal with minor planning applications, hence raising development control capacity in LPAs.
	The grant elements for local authorities being announced today are awarded on a number of different criteria. £20.8 million has been allocated across English local authorities based on their performance in making future plans for their local area. This grant allocation was dependent on local authorities delivering an annual monitoring report to Government Offices by December 31 2005 and all 396 local authorities met this target and will consequently receive £52,525 each.
	This year has seen a huge improvement in local authorities' online planning services with 95 per cent. now achieving a ranking of good or excellent. This is well above the target in our PSA 6 delivery plan which states that "80 per cent. of local authorities are to have 'good or excellent' e-planning services in place by the end of March 2006". We are continuing to use planning delivery grant to incentivise and reward local authorities' achievements in this area. The "e-planning" allocations will range from £4,920 to £24,446 to all authorities ranked as good or excellent through satisfying a minimum of 15 out of 21 e-planning criteria, with the highest awards going to those who achieve all 21.
	Local authorities are rewarded for both improvement towards and achievement of best value development control targets in the period 1 October 2004 to 30 June 2005. These allocations were announced as provisional in December 2005 and I am announcing finalised figures in this statement today. The proportion of grant allocated to local authorities within the high housing demand and growth areas as identified in the communities plan has been increased to further incentivise the step change in housing supply which the Barker review concluded was needed to make housing more affordable for the next generation, with £16 million being allocated in total. This money is allocated in proportion to the contribution of these authorities towards delivering net additions to the housing stock. Pathfinder authorities receive an allocation of £100,000 each in recognition of the low demand for housing in their areas. Local authorities are also awarded £1,743 for each enterprise area within their boundary.
	Regional planning bodies receive grant to support their work preparing regional spatial strategies and in recognition of the additional work which the strengthened regional planning function involves. In 2006–07 this totals £6.835 million. The Greater London Authority (GLA) will receive £90,000 in recognition of its plan making responsibilities. The award is based on the GLA's performance against its business plan, and is given in recognition of work on: sub-regional development frameworks; completion of strategic planning guidance documents; the Housing Capacity Study; and the implementation of the London Plan.
	This year, as in the previous two years, the grant will be subject to conditions to ensure that the Minister has the power to act appropriately to partly withhold payment or recover part or all of grant paid where there are concerns over the accuracy or proven inaccuracies in the information on which allocations were made. I may consider withholding up to 10 per cent. of the grant allocated to authorities whose best value Performance Indicator 109 (BVPI 109) has been qualified by the auditor until we have established to our satisfaction the reason for the qualification and the reliability of the data on which grant was allocated. Following this I may seek to recover some or all of the monies paid to those authorities.
	As part of the allocation criteria for PDG, I have included a provision for abatement of the development control element of the grant. This relates to performance on appeals and was announced as part of the first announcement of provisional figures which I announced in December 2005. This states that where an authority's performance on appeal is at least 40 per cent. worse than the national average (32.65 per cent. of appeals upheld against the authority), 10 per cent. of their development control allocation will be abated.
	Where this performance is at least 50 per cent. worse than the average, this abatement will increase to 20 per cent. of the development control allocation. This condition underlines the continuing importance we place on quality in decision making. Today's announcement confirms the abatements of the 19 authorities whose provisional allocations of the development control element of grant were abated in the first announcement of PDG 06/07 in December 2005, and the £697,358 that this generates will be recycled amongst all other authorities.
	A table showing the amounts of planning delivery grant payable for the financial year 2006–07 is available in the libraries of the House. This sets out the details of each recipient's grant.

Local Government Pension Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 2006

Phil Woolas: My statement to the House of Commons on 28 March re-affirmed our commitment to secure the continued affordability and viability of the Local Government Pension Scheme and to provide secure, equality-proofed pensions for its existing and future membership.
	A statutory instrument will be laid before Parliament today to remove the 85 year rule from the Scheme from 1 October 2006, in order to comply with Council Directive 2000/78/EC. The regulations will also provide protection for existing scheme members who will be 60 and satisfy the 85-year rule by 2013 and will introduce significant and well supported flexibilities into the scheme's legal framework to reflect the simplified tax regime provided by the Finance Act 2004.
	In the light of discussions held yesterday with the trades unions and local government employers, we are calling on both sides to begin talks, to start now on a nothing ruled in nothing ruled out basis, to address the protection of existing scheme members, the recycling of savings, and the development of a more equitable scheme.
	The Government stand prepared to introduce further amendments before the summer recess to update the regulations in light of any agreed proposals which emerge from the talks between the trades unions and local government employers.
	The Government are committed to good quality pensions for local government workers without placing an unfair burden on taxpayers.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Agricultural Waste

Ben Bradshaw: I am pleased to announce that, following consideration of the responses to public consultation, I have today laid before Parliament the Waste Management (England and Wales) regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006 No. 937), The Environment Act 1995 (Commencement No. 23) (England and Wales) Order 2006 (S.I. 2006 No. 934 (C. 27)) and a final regulatory impact assessment.
	The effect of section 75(7)(c) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 is to exclude waste from premises used for agriculture, and waste from mines and quarries, from the waste management controls that apply to "controlled waste". The main purpose of the regulations is to repeal that exclusion and to apply to agricultural waste, and to non-mineral waste from mines and quarries, the national controls that are already in place to comply with the Waste Framework Directive (75/442/EEC as amended) and the Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC).
	The exclusion in section 75(7) (c) of the 1990 Act has been the subject of infraction proceedings on the Waste Framework Directive. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) issued an adverse judgment on this infraction on 16 December 2004 (Case C-62/03) and a copy is available on the Court's website at http://curia.eu.int/jurisp/cgi-bin/ form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Submit&docj= docj&numaff=C-62%2F03&datefs=&datefe= &nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100. The exclusion also applies to the legislation transposing the Landfill Directive in England and Wales.
	At present, most agricultural waste is disposed of on farm in "farm dumps" or by open burning. The regulations will ensure that agricultural waste is recovered or disposed of in ways which protect the environment and human health. The controls will be enforced by the Environment Agency, as the "competent authority" in England and Wales, in ways which are proportionate to the risk to the environment and human health. The existing controls have applied to all other sectors of industry and types of waste since May 1994 in the case of the Waste Framework Directive; and since June 2002 in the case of the Landfill Directive.
	The main consultation paper was sent to 495 organisations and a summary, with a pull-out questionnaire, was sent to 162,000 farmers and growers in England and Wales. There were 103 responses to the main consultation and 2,485 responses to the summary questionnaire. A consultation report has been prepared in compliance with the Cabinet Office "Code of Practice on Consultation" and is available on my Department's website at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/topics/agwaste.htm
	The regulations come into force on Monday 15 May 2006. The Landfill Directive's requirements, section 33(1 )(c) of the 1990 Act and the duty of care under section 34 of the Act will apply from that date. However, the regulations contain transitional provisions which allow farmers six months from that date to register with the Environment Agency to transport agricultural waste on a professional basis or as a dealer or broker; and allow farmers 12 months to apply to the Agency for waste management licences, to dispose of or recover agricultural waste on-farm, or to register licensing exemptions.
	A wide range of licensing exemptions will be available to farmers. As a result of discussions with the Agricultural Waste Stakeholders' Forum and public consultation, we have identified proposals for more licensing exemptions for agricultural waste covering the use of drum incinerators, waste disposal in the event of a plant health disease outbreak, the use of ash from the incineration of non-SRM pig and poultry carcasses, the use of biobeds for pesticide residues and the use of dredgings from ditch clearances. We propose to carry out a supplementary consultation exercise on these proposals for more licensing exemptions during the 12-month transitional period before the regulations' waste management licensing provisions come fully into force.
	The regulations also contain related or consequential amendments to existing regulations. The main amendments are:
	To ensure continuing compliance with the Waste Framework Directive following the repeal of the Animal Waste Directive (90/667/EEC) and the introduction of the EU Animal By-Products Regulation ((EC) No. 1774/2002) which lays down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption. The proposed amendments apply to animal by-products which are waste within the meaning of Article 1(a) of the Waste Framework Directive and are not excluded from the Directive's scope under Article 2;
	To repeal regulation 15 of the Waste Management Licensing regulations 1994 (S.I. 1994 No. 1056 (as amended)) and to amend the Groundwater regulations 1998 (S.I. 1998 No. 2746 (as amended)) to bring waste management licensing into line with other types of "authorisations" for the purposes of complying with the Groundwater Directive (80/68/EEC); and
	To address another aspect of the ECJ's adverse judgment on the Waste Framework Directive infraction by amending section 33(2) of the 1990 Act to provide that section 33(1) (c) applies to household waste from a domestic property; and so to prohibit the disposal etc. of such waste by private individuals, within the curtilage of the property, in a manner likely to cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health. The prohibition already applies to any mineral or synthetic oil or grease, asbestos and clinical waste by virtue of regulation 3(1) of the Controlled Waste regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992 No. 588).

Agriculture and Fisheries Council

Margaret Beckett: I represented the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting in Brussels on 20 March 2006.
	The Council adopted two regulations on the protection of geographical indications (GIs) and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs and on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialties guaranteed.
	The Agriculture Commissioner reported on the market situation in the poultry sector in the light of consumer reactions to avian influenza outbreaks. She said that the measures taken so far to support the sector had not adequately stabilised the market and indicated that the provision under the current legislation for exceptional measures to support the market only caters for an event of serious outbreak in the EU. She therefore announced that a new proposal to widen the scope of the current exceptional measures provision would be presented at the April Council.
	The Council held a policy debate on the review of the EU sustainable development strategy based on presidency questions. I said that the top priorities should be to continue making agricultural policy more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable; to promote animal health and welfare; to improve management of fish stocks by using ecosystem-based approaches; and to counter climate change. The presidency said it would take member states' comments into account when it prepares for the June European Council.
	France presented a memorandum on the CAP, focusing particularly on risk and crisis management measures and simplification of legislation. The memorandum called for new EU measures to help farmers cope with their greater exposure to market fluctuations, following recent and ongoing reform. I welcomed the memorandum as a contribution to the ongoing debate on the future of the CAP and urged the Council to be cautious about introducing EU or other Government measures which contradicted the market direction of recent CAP reforms, stressing that farmers were best placed to judge what risk management measures were best suited to their businesses. The Agriculture Commissioner referred to the Commission's ongoing work on risk and crisis management and CAP simplification and gave an overview of forthcoming work to reform the fruit and vegetable and wine reform sectors towards the end of this year and the proposal for the reform of the Common Market organisation of bananas which would be presented in June.
	Under any other business, the Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection updated the Council on the latest situation with regard to the outbreak of avian influenza in the European Union.
	The Agriculture Commissioner updated the Council on progress in the WTO agricultural negotiations, including the outcome of the G6 Trade Ministers meeting in London earlier this month.
	Italy supported by Spain, Greece, Portugal, France, Malta and Cyprus urged the Commission to resume its contributions to the International Olive Oil Council promotional campaigns.
	The Commission informed the Council that it intended to abolish the system of pre-payment of export refunds which fell under its competence.
	The Austrian presidency announced that their informal meeting of Agriculture Ministers would take place from 28–30 May, it will focus on education, extension, research, and innovation in framing.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

FCO Website and EU Guide

Douglas Alexander: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) will shortly be publishing a revised Guide to the European Union (EU). At the same time the FCO will launch an updated Britain in the EU section of its website. The EU Guide and website are intended to provide more factual information in the public domain on the EU and the future of Europe debate. The EU Guide will be available in public libraries and can be requested directly from the FCO by phone, by letter or online. The website will be available at www.europe.gov.uk.

HEALTH

Health Pay Review Bodies

Patricia Hewitt: I am responding on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the Twenty-first Report of the Review Body for Nursing and Other Health Professions (NOHPRB) and the Thirty-fifth Report of the Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration (DDRB) which have been laid before Parliament today. Copies of the reports have been placed in the Library. I am grateful to the chairs and members of the Review Bodies for their hard work.
	The NOHPRB has recommended an increase in the "Agenda for Change" pay rates of 2.5 per cent. from 1 April 2006. The NOHPRB has also recommended that the high cost area supplements should be increased by 2.5 per cent. The DDRB has recommended with effect from April 2006 general increases in remuneration of 2.2 per cent. for consultants and doctors and dentists in training, 2.4 per cent. for non-consultant career grade doctors and salaried dentists and an increase of 3.0 per cent. in gross remuneration for general dental practitioners. The DDRB has also recommended that the salary range for salaried general medical practitioners should be increased by 2.2 per cent.
	The NOHPRB's pay recommendations are being accepted in full and without staging.
	The DDRB's pay recommendations are being accepted. However, the award for consultants will be staged. Consultants have particularly benefited from pay reform with an average increase in earnings of 11.5 per cent. in the last two years. In considering the DDRB recommendations, it is necessary to consider a range of factors and with the National Health Service currently running a small deficit affordability must also be taken into account. Consultants will therefore receive a 1 per cent. increase from 1 April 2006 increasing to 2.2 per cent. from 1 November 2006.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Hazel Blears: I am announcing today statistics relating to antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs).
	An ASBO is a civil order that protects the community from behaviour that has caused or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as the perpetrator.
	ASBOs were introduced under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and have been available since April 1999.
	ASBOs can be issued to anyone aged 10 years or over. They impose restrictions on the behaviour of individuals who have behaved in an antisocial way and protect communities from often longstanding and highly intimidating activity.
	Breach of an ASBO is a criminal offence and can lead to custody. The maximum penalty for breach of an ASBO is five years' imprisonment or a fine of up to £5,000 for an adult offender.
	The Home Office is notified by all courts of ASBOs issued. As I indicated in my statement on 3 November 2005, Official Report, col. 52–53 WS, a joint exercise between the Court Service and the Home Office is under-way to refine and improve further the collection of this data.
	Data on the number of ASBOs issued are updated quarterly. New figures for the period up to September 2005 are now available. They show that for the period between April 1999 and September 2005 the total number of ASBOs issued (as reported to the Home Office) was 7,356. The number of ASBOs issued in the quarter July to September 2005 is 11 per cent. of the total number of ASBOs issued over all quarters and represents an increase of 7 per cent. on the same quarter last year. However, this represents a decrease of 14 per cent. on last quarter's figures.
	Of those ASBOs issued 55 per cent. were to adults and 43 per cent. to juveniles; (per cent. of ASBOs are age unknown.
	Some 46 per cent. were orders on application and 54 per cent. were orders on conviction.
	I have placed with the House Libraries a briefing note containing information about ASBOs and the ASBOs statistics issued today.

Race and Criminal Justice System (Statistics)

Fiona Mactaggart: Today the Government have published statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System. The statistics, published under section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991, are one of the main sources of information available on Black and other Minority (BME) Ethnic groups' experiences across the CJS.
	The Government are committed to delivering a CJS which promotes equality, does not discriminate against anyone because of their race, that has a workforce which fairly represents the communities it services and is effective in rooting out and tackling racism and racist crime.
	The statistics published today show that significant progress has been made but that there is still much to do. For example on race hate crime the statistics show racist incidents recorded by the police rose in 2004–05 but that the British Crime Survey (which is a large scale survey based on reports of people's individual experience) estimated the number of racist incidents fell. That might be an indication that the progress we have made in investigating and prosecuting hate crime has given people greater confidence to report incidents and been effective in preventing them from happening.
	The representation of BME groups working for CJS agencies has improved, in 2004–05 the Police, Prison, Crown Prosecution, Probation Services and Crown and Magistrates courts all recorded an increase in the number of BME staff.
	There are signs that the confidence of BME groups that the CJS will treat them fairly is improving. The Government have set a target to reduce the percentage of people from BME communities who believe they would be treated worse than people from white communities by one or more CJS agency. The most recent Home Office Citizenship Survey (which is the basis for the measure) shows that, while there has not been a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of people from BME communities who believe one or more agency might discriminate against them, there has been a significant reduction in the proportion who believe it of the Courts, the Police, the CPS and the Prison Service.
	But the Government are not complacent and acknowledge that there is still much to do. The statistics reveal that BME people continue to be disproportionately represented in the CJS. While that data does not necessarily mean there is discrimination it is an issue the Government are committed to addressing. In key areas such as the use of stop and search the statistics do not reveal an increase in the disproportion between different groups but neither has there been a reduction.
	The Government have a programme of work to understand and address this and other issues. While the ultimate outcome of this work will be to secure a reduction in the levels of inappropriate disproportion as well as increased BME community confidence in the CIS it will take time for the initiatives to have an impact.
	We will continue to use these statistics to drive forward further change by ensuring all agencies continue to scrutinise their policies and standards, and work towards ensuring services are delivered fairly to all communities.
	Copies of the statistics will be placed in the House Library and can be accessed on the Home Office website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/section951.html.

Restructuring Probation

Fiona Mactaggart: Today we are publishing the Government's response to the consultation paper, "Restructuring Probation to Reduce Reoffending", published on 20 October 2005.
	On 9 February 2006 we set out our five-year strategy for protecting the public and reducing reoffending. At the heart of our strategy is improved public safety and the reduction of reoffending through the development of more effective end to end management of offenders, throughout the sentence. Every offender will have a named offender manager who will be responsible for making sure that they are both punished and properly rehabilitated, and that the public are protected. They will manage the offender, often from before they are sentenced, throughout any prison sentence, and then during time on a community sentence or on licence in the community.
	Regional offender managers need to be able to fund the delivery of specified contracts based on evidence of what reduces reoffending rather than leaving the prison and probation services to decide what to deliver. The current legal framework allows the Home Office to commission prison services—but not for probation. This asymmetry is one of the biggest barriers to realising our vision of joining up offender management from custody into the community. We will therefore be bringing forward legislation to improve the position.
	During the consultation period we received 748 written replies and met a range of key stakeholders. The document we are publishing today summarises those replies and explains how they will be taken into account as we develop our proposals to reduce re-offending and increase public safety. We will introduce legislation to give effect to these changes as soon as parliamentary time allows.
	Copies of the report are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Prison Service Pay Review Body

Fiona Mactaggart: The Fifth Report of the Prison Service Pay Review Body (PSPRB) on the pay of in-charge governors and operational managers, prison officers and related grades in England and Wales in 2006 has been published today and copies will be placed in the Library. I would like to thank the Chair and members of the PSPRB for their hard work in producing their recommendations.
	The PSPRB have recommended an increase in basic pay for all grades of £425 or 1.6 per cent., whichever is the greater. The recommendation will lead to a growth in the pay bill of 2.57 per cent. to £849 million (excluding oncosts), which is at the upper limit of affordability.
	The Home Secretary has decided that the recommendations will be implemented in full, with effect from the operative date of the award of 1 April 2006. The cost of the award will be met from within the existing budget allocation for the service.
	The Government desire significant improvement in the Prison Service pay and grading structure. It is asking the trade unions to be fully engaged in talks and to commit to:
	1. Participation in the development of the Service wide job evaluation system, initially through positive engagement with the eastern area pilot, which has already commenced.
	2. Work in partnership with Prison Service management and take forward the principles covered in last year's heads of agreement talks.
	3. Immediately reengage with the performance improvement process.
	4. Reform the Whitley council arrangements with a view to establishing long-term partnership agreements based upon single table talks and compliance with the information and consultation of employees directive.
	The Home Secretary expects the trade unions to engage with the Prison Service in talks towards workforce reform based on these principles. The outcome of those talks are likely to inform his remit to the Pay Review Body in respect of next year's pay review.
	The key Pay Review Body recommendations, which take effect from 1 April 2006, are:
	An increase in basic pay for all grades of £425 or 1.6 per cent., whichever is the greater;
	Pay range minima for operational managers to be increased by six spine points, with no change to the range maxima;
	Two additional rates of locality pay at £4,250 and £250. All other rates remain unchanged;
	All specialist allowances to remain at their current level;
	All other allowances and ex gratia payments to be uprated by 1.6 per cent.;
	RHA for operational managers to be uprated by 1.6 per cent.;
	Care and maintenance of dogs allowance to be uprated by 3.2 per cent.;
	Notional rents to be increased by 3.2 per cent.

LEADER OF THE HOUSE

Parliamentary Pensions—Scheme Valuation

Geoff Hoon: The Parliamentary and Other Pensions Act 1987 requires the Government Actuary to make triennial reports on the financial position of the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund. His latest report, dealing with the position of the Fund as at 1 April 2005, is published today and a copy of the report "Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund: Report by the Government Actuary on the Valuation as at 1 April 2005 [HC 979]" has been laid before the House. It includes his recommendation on the rate of Exchequer contributions to be made to the Fund, which the Act requires the Government to follow. The new rate of Exchequer contribution will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Act from 1 April 2006.
	The Government Actuary has assessed that the underlying cost of the benefits accruing under the Parliamentary pension scheme is lower than the cost assessed at the previous actuarial valuation in 2002 (27.4 per cent. of the total pensionable payroll of scheme members compared with 28 per cent.). This is primarily because the Government Actuary has assumed, in the light of recent experience, that MPs will leave and retire at higher ages than was assumed previously. Furthermore, the Exchequer share of the underlying cost has decreased due to higher contributions being paid by most of the scheme's members. The Government Actuary expects members' contributions to total 9.3 per cent.of the payroll, compared with 8.7 per cent. at the 2002 valuation. The Exchequer's share of the underlying cost has therefore fallen from 19.3 per cent. of payroll to 18.1 per cent.
	However, despite the fall in the underlying cost of accruing benefits and in the Exchequer share of that cost, the Government Actuary has recommended an increase in the level of Exchequer contributions to the Fund from the current level of 24 per cent. of payroll to a new level of 26.8 per cent. This is because there has been an increase in the deficit in the Fund (that is, a shortfall of assets to the estimated value of liabilities) since the Government Actuary's last valuation in 2002 from £25.2 million to £49.5 million. (For the purposes of the actuarial valuation, the value of the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund's assets at 31 March 2005 was assessed as £278.6 million).
	The deficit would have risen by around £7 million even if the experience of the scheme had developed entirely in line with the assumptions made at the 2002 valuation—because of the interest that is assumed to accrue on the deficit, and because the increase in Exchequer contributions following the previous valuation only took effect a year after the valuation date. However, the deficit has increased further because the experience of the scheme has differed from what the Government Actuary assumed at the 2002 valuation, and also because the Government Actuary has changed his assumptions about what will happen in the future.
	The main area where the experience of the scheme has differed from what the Government Actuary assumed is in relation to investment returns, which were lower than expected. In common with most other pension funds and other investors in equity shares, the Fund experienced negative investment returns in the first year covered by the Government Actuary's report and positive returns in the subsequent two years. Although the investment returns over the three years as a whole were positive, they were lower than had been assumed. Overall, divergence of the scheme's experience from the Government Actuary's assumptions made at the 2002 valuation contributed around £5 million to the increased deficit.
	The main area where the Government Actuary has changed his assumptions about what will happen in the future is in relation to the longevity of members. Again, in common with other pension funds, the Fund has been affected by the fact that people are living longer. The Government Actuary has assumed that the life expectancy of a 65-year old man has increased by two years to 19.5 years. Overall, changes in the Government Actuary's assumptions contributed around £13 million to the increased deficit.
	The contributions by the Exchequer to the Fund have fluctuated over the years, and the Exchequer has benefited in the past from the fact that the Fund has been in surplus and that lower contributions have been paid as a result. The level of Exchequer contributions over the period 1989 to 2003 varied between 4.4 per cent. and 9.6 per cent. of payroll, representing a saving of between 6.6 per cent. and 11 per cent. of payroll over the Exchequer's share of the underlying cost of the accruing benefits.
	Separately from his report on the actuarial valuation, the Government Actuary has estimated that the capitalised value as at 1 April 2005 of the saving to the Exchequer over the period 1989 to 2003 (that is, the difference between the actual level of the Exchequer contribution and the Exchequer share of the underlying cost of the accruing benefits) is £50 million.
	The Government will be drawing the increased Exchequer contribution to the Fund to the attention of the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) when it next commissions the SSRB to make recommendations on the pension element of the Parliamentary remuneration package.
	The increase of 2.8 per cent in the Exchequer contribution may be broken down as follows:
	
		
			  
		
		
			 Lower ongoing cost of benefit accrual as a result of changes to actuarial assumptions -0.6 per cent 
			 Higher contributions from scheme members -0.6 per cent 
			 Higher deficit contributions as a result of divergence of experience from 2002 valuation assumptions +1.5 per cent 
			 Higher deficit contributions as a result of changes to actuarial assumptions +2.5 per cent

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Report on the UK's Involvement with the World Bank

Hilary Benn: I have placed in the Libraries of both Houses a copy of a DFID report, "The UK and the World Bank 2005".
	This report explains the UK's work with the World Bank from the start of the bank's financial year 2005 (known as FY05: July 2004–June 2005) through to its annual meetings in September 2005. It sets out the positions the UK took in a number of discussions at the bank—on the bank's support to poor countries' development, its role in responding to debates on global issues such as debt, and its institutional effectiveness. The report also records the UK's position on resolutions adopted by the Board of Governors. It is an annual publication, and the next report will cover the period October 2005–September 2006.
	During the year the UK: helped to secure a large increase in the aid the World Bank will give to the poorest countries via its International Development Association; brokered a historic debt deal that will write off 100 per cent. of the debt owed by the heavily indebted poor countries to the World Bank, the IMF and the African Development Bank; encouraged the bank to step up the pace of its work in Africa with a new Africa action plan; and convinced the bank to review its use of conditionality, leading to a set of good practice principles which reflect the spirit of the UK's own policy. We will report on the implementation of these commitments in our next report on the UK and the World Bank.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Northern Ireland Prison Service Corporate and Business Plan 2006–09

Shaun Woodward: I have placed copies of the Northern Ireland Prison Service's Corporate and Business Plan for 2006–09 in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The Corporate and Business Plan contains key performance targets I have set for the Service for 2006–07. These are:
	No escape for top and high-risk prisoners.
	No more than three escapes per 1,000 medium and low risk prisoners.
	The number of staff assaulted by prisoners is less than a ratio of three per 100 prisoners.
	The number of prisoners assaulted by prisoners is less than a ratio of four per 100 prisoners.
	An average of at least 20 hours constructive activity per week for each sentenced prisoner.
	An average of at least 10 hours constructive activity per week for each remand prisoner.
	To ensure 87 per cent. of prisoners serving six months or more are working to a resettlement plan and that 97 per cent. of lifers work to a life sentence plan, including preparation of the plan, within the first six months of sentence.
	Each member of staff should receive an average of five training days.
	Reduce the rate of absenteeism across the Service to 13.75 days per head by 2006–07 with an overall reduction in sick absence of 30 per cent. by 2009–10.
	Lay the Annual Report and Audited Accounts before Parliament prior to the summer recess.
	Ensure the average cost per prisoner place does not exceed £85,250.

Prison Service Pay Review Body

Shaun Woodward: The fourth report of the Prison Service Pay Review Body (PSPRB) on the pay of governor and officer grades in the Northern Ireland Prison Service has been published today.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has decided that the recommendations will be implemented in full, with effect from the operative date of the award of 1 April 2006. The cost of the award will be met from within the existing budget allocation for the service.
	Copies of the report have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

PRIME MINISTER

Wilson Doctrine

Tony Blair: In answer to questions in the House of Commons on 17 November 1966, the then Prime Minister, the right hon. Harold Wilson MP, said that he had given instructions that there was to be no tapping of the telephones of Members of Parliament and that if there were a development which required a change of policy he would at such a moment as was compatible with the security of the country make a statement in the House about it. This approach, known as the Wilson Doctrine, has been maintained under successive administrations.
	The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 updated existing laws and set in place new legal procedures governing the interception of communications carried on both public and private telecommunications systems. I advised the House in a Written Ministerial Statement on 15 December 2005, Official Report, column 173WS, that I had received advice from the Interception of Communications Commissioner, the right hon. Sir Swinton Thomas, on his view of the implications for the Wilson Doctrine of the regulatory framework established under that Act.
	It was Sir Swinton's advice, taking into account the new and robust regulatory framework governing interception and the changed circumstances since 1966, that the Wilson Doctrine should not be sustained.
	I have considered Sir Swinton's advice very seriously, together with concerns expressed in this House in response to my written ministerial statement on 15 December. I have decided that the Wilson Doctrine should be maintained.

Review Body on Senior Salaries

Tony Blair: The 28th report of the Review Body on Senior Salaries, which makes recommendations about the pay of the senior civil service, senior military personnel and the judiciary, is being published today. Copies are in the Vote Office and the Library of the House. I am grateful to the Chairman and members of the Review Body for their work.
	Senior Civil Service
	The Review Body's main recommendations for senior civil servants' pay are:
	i. changes to senior civil service pay ranges as follows:
	
		
			 Pay Band Minimum £ Recruitment & Performance Ceiling £ 
		
		
			 1 55,000 116,000 
			 1A 64,000 127,000 
			 2 80,000 160,000 
			 3 98,000 205,000 
		
	
	ii. individual base pay awards to range from 0 to 9 per cent. depending on performance and relative contribution;
	iii. the minimum non-consolidated bonus payment to rise to £3,000; and
	iv. the Permanent Secretaries new range to be £137,000 to £273,250.
	The Review Body endorses the Government's strategy for senior reward including:
	i. an increase in the senior civil service paybill of 1.75 per cent.; and
	ii. an increase in the non-consolidated bonus pot of 1.2 per cent. of paybill.
	The Government have decided in the light of what is affordable within expenditure plans and the specific circumstances relating to the senior civil service that the increase in paybill proposed by the Review Body should be implemented in two stages. 1 per cent. will be implemented with effect from 1 April 2006, and the remainder with effect from 1 November 2006. The increase in the non-consolidated bonus pot will be implemented with effect from 1 April 2006.
	Senior Military Personnel
	The Review Body's main recommendation for the senior military is an increase of 3 per cent. in the incremental pay scales for senior military officers. The Government accept the recommendations for the senior military and they will be implemented in full from 1 April 2006.
	The Judiciary
	The Review Body's main recommendations for the judiciary are:
	i. an increase averaging 3.4 per cent. for judicial salaries. The range is from 2 per cent. for some office holders to 6.4 per cent. for the Lord Chief Justice; and
	ii. the repositioning within the judicial salary structure of a small number of posts.
	The Government have decided in the light of what is affordable within expenditure plans and the specific circumstances relating to the judiciary that the increases proposed by the Review Body should be paid in two stages. All office holders will receive 1 per cent. with effect from 1 April 2006, and the balance of the recommended amount will be paid with effect from 1 November 2006.
	The recommendations for repositioning certain offices, which arise from a major review of the judicial salary structure, will be implemented.
	Members of Parliament and Ministers
	Pay increases for Members of Parliament and Ministers are linked automatically to the movement of the mid point of the pay bands for the senior civil service. This therefore results in an increase to their salaries of 2 per cent. However, the Government proposes that this increase should also be paid in two stages—1 per cent. with effect from 1 April 2006, and the remainder with effect from 1 November 2006.
	Departmental Expenditure Limits
	The cost of the awards for the senior civil service, senior military personnel, the judiciary and Ministers will be met from within existing departmental expenditure limits.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority/British  Nuclear Group

Alan Johnson: I have this week written to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, to confirm that I have approved its first strategy. Full details will be provided by the NDA when it publishes the strategy later today.
	After carefully considering the views of key stakeholders, including the NDA, the regulators and the unions, I have also agreed the recommendation of the BNFL board that it should sell British Nuclear Group through a competitive sale process. The process will coincide with the letting by the NDA of a new five-year contract for Sellafield and is in line with their strategy to develop a competitive market in decommissioning and bring in private sector expertise to improve performance. BNFL and the NDA will therefore work in close co-operation, with the aim of ensuring that the successful bidder is the best available to improve performance, particularly at Sellafield. I would expect the sale to be completed by autumn 2007.
	I firmly believe that a competitive sale is in BNFL's best commercial interest and represents British Nuclear Group's best chance of operating successfully in the commercial market created by the Energy Act 2004. Bringing in external expertise more quickly contributes to improved clean-up performance for the NDA and is therefore good for the tax payer. BNFL will be holding media briefings later today to provide fuller details.

Offshore Electricity Transmission

Malcolm Wicks: I am making today a statement to the House to announce the Government's decision on the high level regulatory regime to be put in place to regulate offshore electricity transmission.
	This is a key step in the delivery of the targets, goals and aspirations for renewable generation set out in the 2003 Energy White Paper: "Our Energy Future—Creating a Low Carbon Economy".
	The White Paper set out four key goals of energy policy:
	To put the UK on a path to cut carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions by some 60 per cent. by about 2050.
	To maintain the reliability of energy supplies.
	To promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond.
	To ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated.
	Offshore renewable energy can make a major contribution to the delivery of the Government's target of 10 per cent. renewable energy by 2010. Currently there is no regulatory regime in place covering the transmission connection of our second round of offshore wind farms (and the other marine renewables that may follow them) to the onshore electricity grid. However, the Energy Act 2004 gives the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry various powers to set up a regulatory regime for offshore transmission.
	The Government's aim has been to introduce a regulatory regime that facilitates the connection of a proportion of Round 2 (R2) projects in time to contribute to the 2010 target. That objective includes ensuring efficiency of connections and allowing for fair and open access for offshore generators.
	In making my decision I have sought to balance the achievement of the four White Paper goals. The right balance also needs to be struck between the interests of all stakeholders including consumers, offshore developers, transmission companies, and other generators. Grid connections are likely to form 10–15 per cent. of capital costs for the round two wind farms given the considerable cable lengths involved. Certainty about how the grid connection costs will be funded, and the regulation that controls them, is a key factor that developers need in preparing their business models.
	Broadly speaking the consultation document sought views from stakeholders on two high level options for this offshore regime. The main options set out were:
	Extension of arrangements broadly similar to the existing onshore regulated price control approach offshore.
	A light touch regulatory approach with developers directly responsible for funding and construction of cable connections to the onshore system—the licence merchant approach.
	A third option was also included which is a sub-set of the first option above:
	Extension of the existing onshore system offshore but with the addition of some limitation of the highest transmission charges.
	The approach
	I am announcing that the existing onshore regulated price control approach to electricity transmission should be extended offshore, and ruling out the licensed merchant approach.
	In making this decision I have also noted that this was also the option supported by the majority of respondents to the consultation exercise.
	I have concluded that the regulated price control approach has a number of clear advantages. Extending the regulated price control approach offshore will ensure consistency with the regulatory arrangements onshore. It will provide a financial benefit to offshore developers by spreading the costs they face to connect to the onshore electricity system over a number of years. The regulated price control approach will also mean that the responsibility for developing the offshore transmission network will be shared by the System Operator and the Transmission Asset Owners. This should help to ensure that the Government's renewable energy targets are achieved.
	In taking this decision I have sought to put in place a regulatory framework that includes a fair and transparent approach to transmission costs consistent with those faced by onshore generators. At this stage there is insufficient information to indicate that the level of transmission charges offshore would deter renewable generation. Based on the information currently available the Secretary of State does not foresee a need to consider capping transmission charges offshore for the planned round two wind power projects. However, he will continue to keep this under consideration as different offshore technologies develop, taking account of the Government's targets and aspirations for the generation of electricity from renewable energy sources and the cost to consumers being acceptable. Full consultation with all interested stakeholders on any future proposal of this sort would be essential.
	It is likely to be at least eighteen months before the necessary programme of technical work to determine the level of charging is completed, by which time the Energy Review will have concluded. The impact of those charges could therefore be considered in the context of any conclusions that have emerged from the review.
	It is important to bear in mind that regulated price control offshore, while providing the advantages to generators that I mention above, would still involve the charges they face being based on the costs of their connections. The main consideration with the options consulted on was how these costs will be financed. Under the regulated price control approach the costs will be recovered from developers through an annual transmission charge over a fixed period. Under the licensed merchant approach the cost of building the connection would have been met by developers upfront themselves. Only under the price control approach with capping would there be an extra element of cross-subsidisation from other users of the system.
	A fuller consideration of the issues behind my decision can be found in the "Government Response to the joint DTI/Ofgem Public Consultation on the Regulation of Offshore Electricity Transmission", which is published today and is available in the Library of the House, together with an updated Regulatory Impact Assessment.

Companies House

Barry Gardiner: I have set Companies House the following targets for the year 2006–07:
	To ensure that the following services: Companies House Direct, WebCheck, and Web-Filing, are available for 99 per cent. of the time between the hours of 7am and midnight, Monday to Saturday.
	To achieve 40 per cent. take-up for electronic submission of documents 1 by the end of 2006–07 and 75 per cent. take-up by the end of 2007–08.
	To achieve, on average, a monthly compliance rate for accounts submitted of 95.5 per cent.
	To ensure that of 99.5 per cent. of images placed on the Companies House image system are legible.
	To achieve for 2007–08 a reduction in real terms of 10 per cent. compared to 2004–05, in the unit cost of the range of transactions covering registration, company search and active register size.
	To achieve a score of more than 85 per cent. in each quarterly Companies House customer satisfaction survey.
	To resolve 97 per cent. of complaints within five days.
	Central Government Targets
	These are targets that are common to other executive agencies:
	To achieve, taking one year with another, a 3.5 per cent. average rate of return based on the operating surplus expressed as a percentage of average net assets.
	To pay all bills due within 30 days, or on other agreed credit terms, on receipt of goods or services or a valid invoice whichever is later.
	The Chief Executive to reply within 10 days to all letters from Members of Parliament delegated to her for reply.
	1 A document is an individual transaction that a company can make with Companies House to submit or register information.

Protecting Vulnerable Workers, Supporting  Good Employers

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Government are publishing today our strategy to protect vulnerable workers and support good employers. The document sets out the Government's commitments on employment relations policy.
	The Government have combined social justice and economic efficiency, showing that fairness and decent minimum standards are not barriers to jobs and growth. The Government have helped millions of people back into work at the same time as providing a step change in the minimum standards people are entitled to expect in the workplace.
	The Government are honouring our manifesto commitments and are providing certainty about our programme of domestic employment legislation.
	Copies of the document have been placed in the Library together with the regulatory impact assessment.

TRANSPORT

Crossrail (Tunnelling Strategy)

Alistair Darling: The Government are aware of the concerns that have been expressed by the London borough of Tower Hamlets and others in the borough about the impacts of Crossrail in Tower Hamlets. Many of those concerns centre on the works proposed in the Bill in and around Hanbury street to use a site for launching tunnel boring machines and associated works at Pedley street and Mile End Park for removal of excavated material.
	After many months of detailed work with Cross London Rail Links (CLRL) and Transport for London, a solution has been identified that should significantly reduce the implications of Crossrail works for the local community.
	The work carried out by CLRL has involved a fundamental review of its tunnelling strategy. CLRL has concluded that by a major recasting of the construction programme it is possible to accommodate the major part of the tunnelling activities from the two tunnel boring machine launch sites already proposed at Royal Oak in west London and between Canary Wharf and Custom House in the Docklands area of east London. As a result Crossrail would not need to launch tunnel boring machines from Hanbury Street in east London.
	The new tunnelling strategy will significantly reduce the environmental impacts of Crossrail construction in the borough of Tower Hamlets, and we believe they would be positive overall for London. There would be no need for the works between Hanbury street and Pedley street or the conveyor along the Great Eastern main line. Mile End Park would not be needed as a site for stockpiling excavated material. A shaft will still need to be constructed at Hanbury street for ventilation and intervention, but this will be a much smaller structure involving less work and so reducing disruption to the local community. I have asked CLRL urgently to consider these residual impacts so that they can be further ameliorated. An environmental assessment of the alternative strategy will be published in due course.
	LRL's assessment is that constructing the central Crossrail tunnel in this new way will not increase overall the project's programme or budget.
	LRL will in due course write to all affected petitioners setting out the details of the alternative tunnelling strategy and the implications for Hanbury street. This will happen in good time for hearings on these issues in the Bill Select Committee.

Driver, Vehicle and Operator Group

Stephen Ladyman: I am announcing today the Secretary of State's targets for 2006–07 in respect of the Driver, Vehicle and Operator Group.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Alistair Darling), has set a range of high-level targets for the 2006–07 year on behalf of the agencies within the Driver, Vehicle and Operator Group: the Driving Standards Agency, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the Vehicle Certification Agency and the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency. They are included in the agencies' business plans together with their associated measures. The plans also include a range of management targets, performance indicators and key tasks which are appropriate to the agencies' businesses and which reflect the wider DVO change agenda. Copies of the business plans will be placed in the Library shortly.
	The key targets for the Driving Standards Agency are:
	Secretary of State Targets
	Appointments available within nine weeks at 90 per cent. of permanent car driving test centres by 31 March 2006.
	In order to provide off road motorcycle test facilities to comply with EU requirements to have 20 multi-purpose test centres operational by 31 March 2007.
	To achieve candidate satisfaction with the overall service received at 90 per cent. or better.
	Improve driving standards of new drivers.
	Improve standards of professional lorry and bus drivers.
	Improve driving standards of existing drivers.
	In order to raise the standards of tuition and to prevent unqualified ADIs giving instruction to learner drivers, from January 2007 remove ADIs from the Register who failed to pass the HPT by 31 December 2006.
	Maximise staff productivity—Have no more than 10 per cent. of non-productive examiner time during 2006–07.
	Maximise electronic take-up—Develop electronic services to provide greater choice and achieve 60 per cent. of theory test bookings and 50 per cent. of car practical test bookings being made on-line by 31 March 2007.
	Deliver value for money plan improvements by March 2007.
	The key targets for the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency are:
	Secretary of State Targets
	Maintain or improve on the standard of services to the customer.
	Maintain or improve customer satisfaction at the 2005–06 level of 88 per cent.
	Deliver customer choice for operational services through increasing the number of inbound services available via electronic channels.
	Maintain 97.5 per cent. of current vehicle keepers as the level to be successfully traced from the record.
	Work with the Insurance Industry to deliver enforcement of insurance from the record (subject to implementation of the Road Safety Bill).
	By 31 January 2007
	Reduce VED evasion loss to 2.9 per cent.
	Reduce the number of persistent evaders of VED from the June 2002 figure by 50 per cent.
	Deliver the benefits agreed in the value for money plan:
	Financial VfM gain;
	Reduction in workforce;
	Delivery of additional VED;
	Delivery of additional net income from Sale of Marks and income from Cherished Transfers.
	Deliver a programme of e-service capability across the consumer, commercial and business sectors.
	The key targets for the Vehicle Certification Agency are:
	Secretary of State Targets
	To be the class leader in acceptance of type approval certificates by other authorities.
	Improve customer satisfaction rating in core MSC market sector.
	Development of consumer information for secondary safety systems.
	Target new emerging manufacturing markets to ensure that products fully meet EU standards.
	Develop capability for virtual testing, and conduct one parallel virtual/physical test.
	Carry out and enforce an annual programme of in-service emissions testing.
	Achieve a surplus on a full cost basis and deliver benefits consistent with the value for money plan.
	Increase utilisation by an additional three percentage points.
	The key targets for the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency are:
	Secretary of State Targets
	To maintain or improve customer satisfaction at 2005–06 levels.
	To improve the consistency of VOSA's vehicle testing service across the country.
	To contribute to making journeys more reliable on the strategic road network, improving road safety and minimising congestion, by working in partnership with the Highways Agency and targeting "at risk" vehicles.
	To contribute to improved road safety by reducing the administrative burden of commercial operation and increasingly targeting enforcement on non-compliant vehicles and drivers.
	To deliver VOSA's value for money plan.
	Increase the take-up of electronic services available to customers.

European Transport Council

Stephen Ladyman: I attended the Transport Council in Brussels on 27 March.
	The Council's main item was a debate on the draft Public Service Obligation (PSO) regulation which would provide new rules for public funding of rail and road passenger transport services. The discussion focused on the extent of permissible exemptions from competitive tendering, measures to prevent distortion of competition and the status of contracts concluded before any new regulation comes into force.
	Most member states could accept the possibility of contracts for long-distance, regional and suburban rail services being directly awarded without competition. But, the majority could not accept that authorities should also be free to award bus and light rail contracts directly to an operator of their choice. I stated that the UK opposed any extension of the power directly to award contracts beyond the long-distance and regional rail markets, which the Council had accepted in December.
	On behalf of the UK I argued for additional measures to be put in place to prevent distortions of competition by operators in receipt of directly awarded contracts. The UK received limited support for such measures, with most member states believing the Commission's proposal contained sufficient safeguards.
	Most member states favoured the continuation of existing contracts until their expiry date, particularly if the contracts had been awarded on a competitive basis.
	In conclusion, the Austrian presidency invited Coreper to resume its detailed examination of the proposal with a view to bringing a text to the Council for agreement in June.
	The Council also held a discussion on road safety. The Commissioner stressed the value of recently agreed road safety legislation, but noted that further work was necessary. The Commission will therefore shortly come forward with new proposals to meet the objectives of the road safety action plan. The proposals will include minimum safety standards for new roads on the trans-European network, improved cross-border recognition of the most frequent breaches of road safety law, a requirement for retrofitting dead-angle mirrors, and a requirement for the fitting and use of day-time running lights. The UK has concerns about some of these measures and we will need to consider them very carefully.
	The Council also heard the Commissioner's presentation on the communication on the promotion of inland waterway transport ("NAIADES"). The proposal includes a number of strands to revitalise Inland Waterway transport in order to reduce traffic congestion and harmful effects on the environment. The Austrian presidency indicated they want to agree Council conclusions on this proposal in June.
	The Council reached a general approach on aviation security. The proposal, if political agreement is achieved, will update the existing Regulation 2320/02. The new proposal would help to clarify, simplify, and further harmonise legal requirements with the aim of enhancing overall security in civil aviation. The Council also took note that the Commission would complete its study on financing of security by the end of 2006.
	The Council heard the Commissioner's progress report on the SESAR proposal, the project for implementation of the Single European Sky (air traffic management). The Commissioner explained that the proposal would establish a Joint Undertaking to manage the development of a new air traffic management system, which would improve air safety and reduce the environmental impact of aviation. The project would be supported by the European Community, Eurocontrol and industry, and also possibly third countries in the future. The Austrian presidency hopes to reach a general approach at the June Transport Council.
	The Council received a progress report from the Commissioner on the air transport negotiations between the EU and the US. He reported that the US Government aims to finalise its rule on airline control by the end of April. In the Commissioner's view, and provided the US proposals were acceptable, this timeframe could allow Ministerial approval at the June Transport Council and a signature at the EU-US summit on 21 June.
	The Council was able to agree conclusions and to grant the Commission a mandate to take forward negotiations with Russia regarding Siberian overflight payments.
	The Commissioner gave a progress report on the Galileo satellite navigation project. The second round of negotiations with the consortium bidding for the PPP concession have begun, and the contract is expected to conclude by the end of the year. The most difficult issues so far were: risk sharing between the public and the private sectors; and design risk. The Commissioner will provide a further update on development at the June Transport Council and would inform member states on the outcome of the negotiations as soon as they were known. The presidency noted that it would be important to provide information to member states in sufficient time to allow them to make an assessment of the outcome of the negotiations before the contract was signed.
	The presidency noted that member states had responded in writing to the three questions on the EU strategy for sustainable development proposed by a Friends of the Presidency group to inform debate at the next European Council. The Austrian presidency will produce a summary.
	The Council achieved a political agreement without debate on the draft recast directive on driving licences. I abstained on behalf of the UK. While, the Government support much of the text; the Government were concerned about the provisions on motorcycle staging. The Government considered that the system for motorcycle staging will create significant difficulty for our motorcyclists, with no tangible benefit for road safety in the UK. The Government tabled a minutes statement making our objections clear.
	Without debate, the Council accepted the European Parliament's 2nd Reading amendments to its common position on the Eurovignette directive, which will establish new Community rules for the charging of heavy goods vehicles. This agreement between the Council and Parliament was facilitated during the UK presidency.
	There were a number of additional AOB points of which the most significant were:
	The Commission reported on supply chain security and noted that there was already legislation on airports, port facilities and on the ports themselves. This proposal served as a way of linkage to increase security of the supply chain. The proposal would be a voluntary system to provide a quality label of "safe operators" showing that they complied with minimum standards. The Commission said that the benefit for safe operators would be reduced checks and paperwork which could give them a competitive advantage.
	The Commission presented its proposed directive on promotion of clean road vehicles. The Environment Council will be taking forward this proposal for which 25 per cent. of publicly procured vehicles over 3.5 tonnes will be required meet enhanced environmentally friendly vehicle standards.
	The Commission informed the Council that it had withdrawn the proposal on access to port services. The forthcoming Commission review of the EU Transport Policy White Paper would include a chapter on ports focusing on transparent financing of port operations and the application of competition rules.
	During lunch there was a discussion of the Commission's mid-term review of the EU Transport Policy White Paper. There was a consensus that the proposed shift away from focusing on modal shift to an approach that makes the best use of each mode was a sensible approach. There was also a discussion on the response of the transport sector to a possible future (human) flu pandemic, during which there was an agreement to share best practice.

Highways Agency

Stephen Ladyman: The Highways Agency's 2006–07 business plan is published today and contains eight key indicators for the agency to deliver by 31 March 2007. These are:
	
		
			 Indicator 06–07 Target 
		
		
			 Deliver the PSA target to make journeys more reliable on the strategic road network by 2007–08. Make journeys more reliable on the strategic road network by ensuring that the average vehicle delay on the 10% slowest journeys is less in 2007–08 than the baseline period. 
			 1. Deliver improved management of the strategic road network. Assess the impact of the Agency's initiatives to improve journey time reliability by end October 2006, using the information to shape forward delivery programmes and produce a delivery trajectory by December 2006. Achieve full capability of the HA Traffic Officer service across all 7 Regional Control Centres (RCCs) by December 2006. 
			 2. Deliver the programme of improvements to the strategic road network. Achieve at least 2023 of 2129 progress points for delivery of the strategic roads programme. Introduce controlled use of hard shoulder on the Active Traffic Management (ATM) pilot on the M42 by March 2007. Complete a cumulative total of at least 74 of 92 priority action sites at junctions. 
			 3. Deliver improvements to journeys by making information available to influence travel behaviour and inform decisions. Evaluate the influence on driver behaviour of information channels currently available and during 2006–07 develop an improvement action plan for implementation on 2007–08. In line with the Highways Agency Information Strategy develop, for Ministerial approval, 3 new cost effective driver information services which contribute to improving journey reliability and safety for our customers. Evaluate the impact of those travel plans introduced in 2005–06 and in light of the experience gained, introduce at least 7 travel plans (making a cumulative total of at least 10) by March 2007. 
			 Deliver the Agency's agreed proportion of the national road casualty reduction target. Reduce by a third (i.e. to 2244) the number of people killed/seriously injured on the core network compared with the 1994–98 average of 3366. 
			 4. Deliver improvements on the network to reduce the number of people killed/ seriously injured. Reduce by at least 748 to 2618. 
			 5. Maintain the network in a safe and serviceable condition. Maintain a road surface condition index score of 100±1 
			 6. Mitigate the potentially adverse impact of strategic roads and take opportunities to enhance the environment taking into account value for money. Deliver the Highway's Agency's contribution to the Department's joint PSA target for air quality. Achieve an average score of no less than 95% across the 5 sub targets Air Quality: implement measures to improve the air quality in at least 2 prioritised Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) making cumulative total of 4 completed improvements in the 28 priority areas.Biodiversity: Achieve at least 7% of the published HA Biodiversity Action Plan, which extends across 15 targets (making a cumulative total of 41% of the HA BAP complete).  Landscape: Introduce at least 9 planting schemes to enhance the landscape.  Noise: Treat at least 110 lane km of concrete road surface with lower noise surfacing. Water: Treat at least 4 pollution risk water outfall sites. Improve the environmental performance of major schemes by improving the average score for the environmental sub-criteria in the Appraisal Summary Table, in at least 5 out of the 10 sub-criteria. 
			 7. Deliver a high level of road user satisfaction. Achieve an overall customer satisfaction level score of at least 82% on Trunk Roads and at least 84% on Motorways across core objectives:  Journey time reliability  Safety  Environment 
			 8. Deliver the Highways Agency's contribution to the Department's efficiency target Deliver efficiency improvements in roads procurement through adding value to service delivery of £132m in 2006–07. Deliver our programme within the allocated administration budget, which requires an efficiency improvement of at least 2.5% per annum. 
		
	
	Explanatory notes against each of these indicators are provided in the business plan, copies of which have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Copies of the Highways Agency Information Strategy have also been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Government Car and Despatch Agency

Stephen Ladyman: I am pleased to announce the Secretary of State for Transport's targets for 2006–07 in respect of the Government Car and Despatch Agency (GCDA). The Secretary of State has set a range of high-level targets for the 2006–07 year on behalf of the GCDA. They will be included in the Agency's Business Plan together with their associated measures. The plan will also include a range of management targets, performance indicators and key tasks which are appropriate to the Agency's business. Copies of the Business Plan will be placed in the Library in due course.
	The key targets for the Government Car and Despatch Agency are:
	Secretary of State Targets
	To break even on an accruals basis.
	To maintain a customer satisfaction index score at least at 2005–06 levels of 86.7.
	To maintain accreditation for ISO 9001.
	By March 2007 to reduce the average tailpipe emissions of the Government fleet by 5 per cent. compared with March 2006 levels.
	To increase the use of alternative engine and fuel technology in GCDA vehicles by 10 per cent. by March 2007 against 2005–06 levels.
	To reduce the administrative charges to customers by 2 per cent. against 2005–06.

Railways (North-East)

Derek Twigg: Today the Department for Transport has published the North East Regional Planning Assessment for the railways (RPA), the second in a series of 11 RPAs covering England and Wales. The north-east RPA covers the north-east of England region and a small part of North Yorkshire where the railway services are closely linked to the north-east network.
	RPAs are the key link between regional spatial planning (including preparation of regional transport strategies) and planning for the railway by both Government and the rail industry and are designed to inform the development of the Government's strategy for the railway. They look at the challenges and options for development of the railway in each region over the next 20 years, in the wider context of forecast change in population, the economy and travel behaviour. An RPA does not commit the Government to specific proposals. Instead it sets out the Government's current thinking on how the railway might best be developed to allow wider planning objectives for a region to be met, and identifies the priorities for further development work.
	The area covered by the north-east RPA has a population of just over 2.5 million, mainly concentrated around the two major conurbations of Tyne and Wear and the Tees-Valley. While population levels are not expected to grow significantly, structural changes in the type of employment available are expected to increase labour market participation rates and prosperity for residents of the region. In general, greater prosperity can be expected to lead to more trips and longer travel distances for all types of journey. Growth in rail passenger journeys is forecast for the region and it is expected that there will be particular growth in longer distance journeys, linking the north-east to other regions.
	Planning for railways in the north-east needs to take into account a changing economic and social context. Rail has a part to play in addressing national and regional government agencies' aims to close the gap that has opened up between the prosperity of the north-east and the rest of the UK over the next decade. This aim is the prime objective of recent initiatives such as the Northern Way, which have influenced the formulation of the north-east RPA.
	The RPA clarifies the role of the railway in the region, its contribution to the economy and its place in the overall transport system, setting out where greater rail capability and capacity will be needed over the next 20 years, and the options for responding to that need. In the shorter term it recommends optimising timetables, improving accessibility and interchanges, and matching resources to demand best to use existing capacity and improve performance.
	Copies of the document have been placed in the House Library.

Safety Cameras

Stephen Ladyman: I have today approved the operational cases submitted by the 38 safety camera partnerships in England and Wales to enable them to continue as part of the national safety camera programme in 2006–07.
	As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport announced on 15 December 2005, 2006–07 will be the last year of the safety camera programme under the current netting-off funding arrangements.
	The Department has worked closely with the safety camera partnerships to help them to develop operational cases for 2006–07, which will ensure that all camera activities continue to contribute to reducing speeds and casualties and assist in the achievement of the 2010 casualty reduction targets.
	All activities and camera sites will comply with the "Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the Safety Camera Programme in England and Wales for 2006–07" which we published on 30 January 2006.
	In 2006–07, the 38 operational cases project that there will be, in total:
	Expenditure of approximately £109 million.
	Fixed penalties of approximately £120 million.
	Some 300,000 speeding offenders referred to speed awareness courses, which are being rolled out nationally by the Association of Chief Police Officers from 1 April 2006.
	Some 233 new safety camera sites (fixed, mobile, route and red light).
	Some 30 existing sites decommissioned.
	Below is a table which shows a breakdown for each partnership.
	
		New sites proposed
		
			 Partnership Proposed Total Expenditure Fixed Mobile Red Light Route Total Sites to be decommissioned in 2006-07 
		
		
			 Avon & Somerset £4,618,076 0 0 0 0 0 4 
			 Bedfordshire £2,683,684 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Cambridgeshire £1,294,346 0 0 0 0 0 2 
			 Cheshire £1,859,491 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Cleveland £1,360,810 0 2 0 0 2 0 
			 Cumbria £2,337,328 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Derbyshire £1,651,150 1 3 0 0 4 0 
			 Devon & Cornwall £2,907,034 0 12 1 0 13 2 
			 Dorset £3,111,530 0 3 0 0 3 1 
			 Essex £4,318,462 5 21 0 0 26 0 
			 Gloucestershire £721,256 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gtr Manchester £3,148,769 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hampshire £2,809,805 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Hertfordshire £2,841,000 0 2 0 0 2 0 
			 Humberside £2,356,799 1 0 0 2 3 0 
			 Kent £2,958,577 1 8 1 0 10 0 
			 Lancashire £2,832,446 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Leicestershire £1,574,406 0 5 0 1 6 1 
			 Lincolnshire £1,475,325 0 1 0 0 1 1 
			 London £10,219,014 21 0 0 0 21 5 
			 Merseyside £1,672,308 4 23 0 0 27 0 
			 Norfolk £1,337,916 2 9 0 10 21 0 
			 North Wales £3,187,055 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Northamptonshire £2,880,879 1 7 1 0 9 0 
			 Northumbria £2,577,231 1 10 3 0 14 0 
			 Nottingham £3,372,726 5 4 0 0 9 0 
			 South Wales £5,942,575 0 0 0 0 0 2 
			 South Yorkshire £3,131,522 3 7 1 0 11 0 
			 Staffordshire £2,211,634 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Suffolk £1,990,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Surrey £1,596,551 2 2 1 0 5 0 
			 Sussex £2,613,412 3 2 0 0 5 0 
			 Thames Valley £5,375,651 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Warwickshire £2,552,000 2 3 1 0 6 0 
			 West Mercia £2,629,648 1 1 0 0 2 0 
			 West Midlands £3,179,139 0 0 0 0 0 10 
			 West Yorkshire £3,253,970 6 23 0 0 29 0 
			 Wiltshire £2,743,808 0 4 0 0 4 0 
			 
			 Total £109,327,513 59 152 9 13 233 30

London and Continental Railways

Alistair Darling: I reported on 14 February 2006 that my Department has been considering its future relationship with London and Continental Railways (LCR) who are responsible for the construction and operation of Channel Tunnel Rail Link and had also been independently approached by a third party, with an interest in the potential acquisition of the shareholders' interests in LCR. I announced on 1 March 2006 that, given such interest, the best way of delivering continuing value for money for the taxpayer would be for there to be an open, transparent, competitive process and that my Department was discussing this approach with LCR's shareholders.
	Having considered the matter, it is clear that certain shareholders do not wish to sell their shares at this time. Meanwhile, LCR and its shareholders have proposed a significant overhaul of the future relationship with the Department, which I welcome. There is therefore no need to proceed with a competitive process now. My main concern is to secure best value for taxpayers as well as continuing value for money and so we will look again with shareholders at a later stage, probably once the Channel Tunnel Rail Link has been commissioned, which we expect to be in 2007.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Advance from the Contingencies Fund

John Hutton: The approval of the Department for Work and Pensions spring supplementary estimate via the Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) (No 2) Bill will not occur until the end of the month. Parliamentary approval for additional resources of £1,252,950,000 has been sought in the Department's spring supplementary estimate. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £750,000,000 will be met by a repayable cash advance from the contingencies fund.

Discretionary Loans Scheme

James Plaskitt: I am pleased to announce changes to the discretionary loans scheme from 3 April 2006.
	We have greatly simplified the rules for determining the size of the maximum budgeting loan amount that can be offered to eligible applicants. There are now only three rates that can be offered: one for single people; one for couples without children; one for families with children.
	The complex "double debt" rule is abolished so that those applicants with existing budgeting loan debt have more help available to them. This, and the simpler rules for determining size of the maximum budgeting loan, means that applicants will understand better the help that is available and when they can access it.
	We have increased the overall limit on loan amounts that any applicant can borrow from the social fund. At the same time we are reducing the highest loan repayment rates and giving applicants longer to repay their loan debt.
	Also from 3 April 2006, budgeting loan applicants will benefit from being able to have more savings before any budgeting loan award is affected. The capital limit is doubled to £1,000 (under pension age) and £2,000 (pension age).
	Overall this is a significant package of changes. Also, in making loans more affordable and easier to access, we aim to help people avoid alternative high cost lenders.

Agency Target and Business Plans 2006–07

John Hutton: I am today able to announce the annual performance targets in 2006–07 for each of the executive agencies of the Department for Work and Pensions. The targets I have agreed are set out below.
	Further information on the plans of the Pension Service, Child Support Agency, Disability and Carers Service and the Rent Service in 2006–07 is contained in their individual business plans which have been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library. Copies of the Jobcentre Plus business plan will be made available in due course.
	
		Jobcentre Plus
		
			 2006–07 
			 Job Outcomes Target (JOT) 
		
		
			 To achieve a total points score of 13,500,000 based on the job outcomes Jobcentre Plus achieves 
			 * As JOT is a new measure the JOT points level is not comparable to the level set under the Job Entry Target for 2005–06. 
			 Business Delivery Target 
			 To ensure that specified key Jobcentre Plus business processes are delivered efficiently, accurately and to specified standards in 94 per cent. of cases checked. 
			 Components Planning Assumption 
			 income support accuracy 90 per cent. 
			 jobseeker's allowance accuracy 94 per cent. 
			 labour market interventions 96 per cent. 
			 incapacity benefit accuracy 95 per cent. 
			 lone parent review work focused interviews 95 per cent. 
			  Monetary Value of Fraud and Error Target 
			 By March 2007 to continue to ensure that losses from fraud and error in working age income support and jobseeker's allowance amount to no more than current (March 2006) levels of loss or no more than 5.2 per cent. of the monetary value of these benefits paid during the year, whichever represents the lower figure (as measured against the 1998 baseline). 
			  Customer Service Target 
			 To achieve an 84 per cent. customer service level in the delivery of the standards set out in the Customers and Employers Charters. 
			   
			 Employer Outcome Target 
			 At least 86 per cent. of employers placing their vacancies with Jobcentre Plus will have a positive outcome. 
			  Average Actual Clearance Times Target 
			 To process claims, within specified average actual clearance times for incapacity benefit, income support and jobseeker's allowance—18 days, 11 days, and 12 days respectively. 
		
	
	The Pension Service
	By 2008, be paying pension credit to at least 3.2 million pensioner households while maintaining a focus on the most disadvantaged by ensuring that at least 2.2 million households are in receipt of the guarantee credit.
	Improve working age individuals' awareness of their retirement provision such that by 2007–08 some 15.4 million individuals are regularly issued a pension forecast and 60,000 successful pension traces are undertaken a year.
	Issue winter fuel payments for 2006–07 (over 99 per cent. of all automatic payments and successful claims received before 23 September 2006) by Christmas 2006.
	Reduce sick absence rates to 8 days per capita.
	Ensure that 95 per cent. of telephone calls received by the Pension Service centres are answered by customer advisors and less than 1 per cent. of attempted telephone calls receive the engaged tone or message.
	Achieve a pension credit accuracy rate of at least 96 per cent.
	Achieve a state pensions claims accuracy rate of at least 98 per cent.
	Child Support Agency
	Collection rate: new and old scheme
	By 31 March 2007, where maintenance is paid through the collection service the Agency will collect, on average across both the new and old schemes, 90 per cent. of the amount due.
	Maintenance outcome
	By 31 March 2007, in 65 per cent. of cases across both the new and old schemes in which a liability to pay maintenance exists, the non resident parent has either made a payment via the collection service, or a maintenance direct arrangement is in place. In addition, further ensuring that at least this level of performance is achieved for those new scheme cases in which the parent with care is on income support or income-based jobseeker's allowance.
	Throughput
	By 31 March 2007, the agency will clear 55 per cent. of new applications within 12 weeks of receipt and 80 per cent. in 26 weeks.
	New application backlogs
	By 31 March 2007, the agency will have reduced the volume of uncleared new scheme applications by 25 per cent. of the amount outstanding by the end of March 2006.
	Accuracy
	By 31 March, 2007, accuracy on the last decision made for all new or old scheme maintenance calculations carried out and checked in previous 12 months to be correct to the nearest penny in at least 87 per cent. of cases.
	Debt
	The agency will collect arrears equivalent to 40 per cent. of the amount accruing due to non payment of regular maintenance between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007.
	Disability and Carers Service
	Ensure that for the period 1 April 2006 to 30 September 2006 at least 90 per cent. of calls to the DLA/AA helpline, our national telephone service, are answered first time and from 1 October 2006 ensure that at least 92 per cent. of calls are answered first time.
	Ensure that less than 1 per cent. of all calls attempted to the DLA/AA helpline receive an engaged tone/automated message.
	Increase the percentage of customers satisfied with the service provided by Disability and Carers Service to 85 per cent., an increase of 2 per cent. above the 2005 Customer Satisfaction Survey.
	Clear new claims for disability living allowance within an average of 39 working days, new claims for attendance allowance within an average of 19 days and carer's allowance within an average of 15 working days.
	Achieve an accuracy rate of 90 per cent. on decisions on claims for disability living allowance and 92 per cent. for attendance allowance.
	Achieve a financial accuracy rate of 98 per cent. on carer's allowance payments.
	Reduce sick absence to 8 average working days lost;
	Meet the efficiency challenge by delivering a staffing level of 6,038.
	Reduce the cost of processing benefits to:
	AA/DLA claims£164.92
	AA/DLA live load£8.64
	CA claims£97.93
	CA live load£8.69
	The Rent Service
	Service Delivery
	
		Speed of Processing
		
			
			 Type of Determination Timescale for the Year 2006–07 Target Outturn 
		
		
			 housing benefit:   
			 With an inspection within 15 working days 94 per cent. 
			 Without an inspection within 3 working days 94 per cent. 
			 Pre-Tenancy within 4 working days 94 per cent. 
			 Redetermination within 15 working days 94 per cent. 
			
			 Fair Rents within 40 working days 94 per cent. 
		
	
	Quality
	95 per cent. of Local Reference Rent (LRR) Housing Benefit determinations to be upheld on redetermination.
	95 per cent. of all Fair Rent valuations that are checked as part of our quality assurance processes are verified as being accurate.
	Customer Satisfaction
	Local Authority Housing Benefit Department Customers
	Our target is to ensure that at least 95 per cent. of our local authority customers rate our service as satisfactory or better during 2005–06.
	Fair Rent Customers & Housing Benefit Inspections
	Our target is to ensure that at least 95 per cent. of our fair rent customers, and those housing benefit claimants whose properties we inspect, rate our service as satisfactory or better during the year.
	Productivity
	To increase productivity by 7 per cent. by the end of the year.
	Cost per case
	To reduce cost per case by 6 per cent. in real terms by the end of the year.

Social Fund

James Plaskitt: I am pleased to announce that the gross discretionary social fund budget for 2006–07 will be £842 million.
	This includes an increase in net treasury funding of £120 million. The increase is the first of three annual increases which in total comprise a substantial £210 million boost to support changes to the discretionary loans scheme announced in pre-Budget reports of 2004 and 2005.
	With the investment of the extra net funding of £120 million, I have been able to allocate a gross national loans budget of £700 million from 1 April 2006.
	I have also decided to increase the national community care grant budget by £3 million to £141 million. This is the seventh consecutive annual increase and means that the national community care grant budget is now almost 44 per cent. higher than in 1999–2000. £1 million will be retained centrally as a contingency reserve. For example to provide additional help to districts facing unexpected and unplanned expenditure.
	Details of individual district budget allocations will be placed in the Library.
	The discretionary social fund budget is cash limited. Budgets are allocated to districts on 1 April each year.
	The gross discretionary SF budget allocated for 2006–07 is £842 million made up of:
	New money (AME) £298.2 million
	Forecast loan recovery £543.8 million
	This was allocated as follows:
	Loans £700 million
	Grants £141 million
	Contingency reserve £1 million
	If the forecast for loan recoveries proves to be an underestimate, any additional recoveries can be allocated to districts during the year.
	The contingency reserve is held centrally and allocations made from it reimburse districts for expenditure resulting from a local accident or disaster— for example, floods.